Let's be real here. I should break it to you that these Disney characters...aren't real. But I am required to write a few more words on this subject so let's continue towards what some might think a non-conclusion. Because many gender issues and life in general is not black and white there's rarely any kind of answer or justification in turning something on it's head to make a point. Instead you end up perpetuating whatever the original offence was and up the body count. It's why I often find Caitlin Moran's test of asking 'are the men doing it?' unhelpful.
You don't have to scroll down a comments section very far on a feminist article or site to see someone calling 'double standards'. Usually they have misunderstood or are trying to bend the argument to fit another subject that serves them better than, say, investing in the safety of women by education men not to, like, attack them.
If we flip the male gaze do we gain or lose? We get the radical notion across that women are sexual, that women talk to each other about sex and hey, we notice faults or flaws in your bits.
Writing in The Daily Beast Emily Shire said: "it is perturbing to see the site proudly revel in the double standard of giving their favorite Disney characters "idealized" genitals and the villains smaller, less "attractive" ones. To briefly indulge in a close-reading of the Disney prince dick descriptions...Morissey perpetuates the same pressure on men to exhibit a certain physique that she critiqued Disney of doing to women."
If we flip the male gaze do we gain or lose? We get the radical notion across that women are sexual, that women talk to each other about sex and hey, we notice faults or flaws in your bits. What's interesting here is that it's presented with the justification that men can handle it. They won't read it and think 'something must be done about my unacceptable body!' A lifetime of not being objectified might have provided them with a resilience.
But perhaps we should test that out.